England has never had its own national anthem. There is support to introduce one though. http://anthem4england.co.uk/Quote:
Originally Posted by Nedser
Printable View
England has never had its own national anthem. There is support to introduce one though. http://anthem4england.co.uk/Quote:
Originally Posted by Nedser
I was surprised that England has never had its own official anthem considering it was an independent country for about 800 years, but actually I think you're right.Quote:
Originally Posted by boovidge
However, my point still holds - GSTK was originally a song in honour of the English monarch rather than British (as it was written long before the creation of the Kingdom of Britain, which later became the UK). It also became established as the UK's national anthem by virtue of it being sung in London theatres in support of the English King George II who was in battle with Bonnie Prince Charlie at the time. Hence the lines added in that era "And like a torrent rush, Rebellious Scots to crush, God save the King". If you're interested, more information officially sanctioned by her majesty here.
Leaving aside all of that anyway, it's an anthem that at best only about 50-60% of the population of NI identify with, and even then they identify with it in the context of being "British" rather than "Northern Irish".
When was GSTK first used? Because obviously if it was sung in England before the Union of the Crowns in 1603 then It can be described as an English "anthem". Since then the English and Scottish monarch has been the same. I've looked at wikipedia and it mentions an early version being published in 1745 well after the union of the crowns and 40 years after the Act of Union forming the state of Great Britain. If you have a more reliable source about its origins I'd be interested to see. I always interpreted the "rebellious Scots" bit of GSTK (frequently brought up in English/Scottish/British debates, though it's hardly ever used) to be targetting the rebellious Scots rather than Scots in general, of which many were "non-rebellious" :D
Why would the FAI seek and settle for a "Gentleman's Agreement"? Surely, given that they were in conflict with the IFA, they would want to document this agreement rather than just seeking a verbal agreement?Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
The FIFA intervention in the 1950s was necessary simply because the IFA had joined FIFA and there could not exist a situation where players were choosing which Association they preferred to line-out for on a given day, for a given match. What the FIFA intervention "achieved" was (a) the introduction of the team names "Northern Ireland" and the "Republic of Ireland" (b) the division of the existant pool of international players on the basis of which side of the border they were born (remember there existed players at the time that had played for both associations so to decide which team these individual players would play for from this point on, their place of birth was used) and (c) the confirmation that the IFA was the association for Northern Ireland only (up to now the IFA had been operating as an all island association).
If a gentleman's agreement existed it would have been agreed in conjuction with the FIFA intervention or in the immediate aftermath of this intervention. However the only reference to this agreement is in an IFA commissioned book - so its existence is already in question. Conveniently enough the details of said and supposed agreement are very sketchy. Despite your insistence on the existence of the agreement you do not know basic information details like the date the agreement took place, where the agreement took place, who shook on the agreement etc etc. The only thing you believe to know about the agreement is the outcome. The latest IFA statement regarding FIFA's eligibility statues highlights the IFA's unique and historical lack of competence. That the IFA chose to harp on about Article 16 without bothering to read Article 15 of the eligibility statues is incompetence of the highest order. That the IFA subsequently chose to waste more time and resources (time and resources that could be best served developing players for us) in seeking FIFA to uphold the eligibility statutes is mind-blowing. Your "anger" towards the FAI is ultimately born from an inner realisation of the IFA's incompetence. But it's much more easier to blame somebody else than to accept your own failings.
The FAI & IFA both have a role to play in getting this ironed out, I'm far from convinced about an AI team, not because I personally have an issue with it but I think there would be many who would, on both sides of the fence. Maybe in the future but I think we’re still a long way from that scenario.
It’s very convenient & rather schoolyard for the IFA to cry foul and run to FIFA saying “the big boys are stealing all our players” without them looking at the reasons behind the moves. Why did Lennon retire early? What effect did that have on underage Catholic players in NI? What can be done from the IFA to stem the tide? Personally I think they have made very little effort and a few simple steps would pave the way, replace GSTQ with Danny Boy (used in the Commonwealth games) or something more unique to NI.
If moving from Windsor isn’t an option anymore (I still think the idea of a multi-sports venue in Belfast is a fantastic solution) they should make more of an effort to reach the Nationalist community, I have friends from NI who would never dream of going to Windsor, but would come to Dublin reguarly for games
Now to the Fai. Stop the scouting of underage players. Stop the approaches to players of nationalist backgrounds with a view to turning their heads.
I have no problem if a kid from Derry or Belfast comes to the Fai and says, I want to play for you. I wouldn’t expect the FAI to turn him away, I would expect them to say okay we’ll consider you for future squads & let the IFA know the score. It’s the active recruiting that upsets NI fans and that’s where the FAI need to reign it in.
The same Wikipedia article refers to the "earliest known version by John Bull (1562–1628)". Doesn't really clear up whether that was before or after 1603. Anyway, the two monarchies and countries remained distinct until 1707, it just so happened that the same person held both from 1603 on. Also from Wikipedia "The term itself (Union of the Crowns), though now generally accepted, is misleading; for properly speaking this was merely a personal or dynastic union, the Crowns remaining both distinct and separate, despite James's best efforts to create a new "imperial" throne of 'Great Britain'. England and Scotland continued to be independent states".Quote:
Originally Posted by boovidge
I decided to dig out his book to refresh my memory. He actually played for Ireland for 11 years before he obtained an Irish passport. His exact words about the change of policy in 1996 were "On the eve of the game, we submitted our passports for inspection but were informed by officials of a change in FIFA rules, stipulating that all players had to be citizens of the country for which they had declared. I had always travelled under a British passport ........ If I want to play for Ireland again I'm going to need an Irish passport".Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
So in addition to common sense dictating that FIFA obviously would ask for proof of eligibility, we have an account of an incident in 1996 from a former player stating that FIFA requires players to produce passports to prove their nationality. I think we can put this to bed now, unless someone wishes to argue that Cascarino made this whole story up.
And what do you feel was addressed after this engagement with Duffy? Or Gibson? You speak of good players that might otherwise be lost? Through a choice afforded to them. The IFA need to think of it in terms of 'Insulating' themselves from the ruling. That guy Kee has offered the only constructive statements in all of this, in my mind any way. I think the rest is very short sited.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gather round
The only dishonour is the fact that the FAI stuck with such a "gentlemens agreement" for so long, if indeed such a thing ever existed. At best is seems very loose.Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
As in all things it is necessary to make trade offs. What is the right decision: Stick with a loose agreement with the IFA or allow Irish men to play for their country, their entitlement ?
Over the years the IFA and their fans have done little to warrent loyalty from the FAI - perhaps in some alternative universe - but not thru the N Irish Vs Ireland games, plus all the other antics I've witnessed over many years.
You didn't read the post did you? I said instead of talking hot air about liking to change the anthem, go and do it! I mentioned this on another thread, see below:Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
http://foot.ie/threads/128265-Norn-I...=1#post1291046
Any word on that meeting GR?
You know the one which might actually help you a lot more than running away to Switzerland...:confused:
There has been little visible in being Irish for quite some time now, don't be silly. Feeble minded eh? What is it with the OWC fans and their reudction to name calling when they get their own way? Especially from Mr "F**k All Integrity". Tut tut tut.Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
Yes, you have to acknowledge. Show some humility, you are not in a good position!Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
Only one of them boos their own players based on religion, identity or background.Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
NI fans calling the FAI sectarian is like the KKK calling the Jackson Five racist...
Complete and utter rubbish.Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
Do you realistically think that the FAI would turn down Johnny Evans if offered? Nope
Do any southern rugby fans care whether Paddy Wallace, Ferris, two-try Tommy Bowe etc are Catholics/ Protestants/Mormons? Nope.
No-one questioned the religion of Houghton/Townsend/anyone who donned the Republic shirt, its not an issue in Dublin. Only up the road! Not in England, Wales and (by and large) Scotland either. Just because you have an issue, doesn't mean other people do. Get out of the trenches!
That's you own problem. Kernaghan is an example of how the IFA invent their own rules (and morality) as they see fit. Its also an example of how they panic after realising their own ineptitude. Just like now, dear oh dear, how history repeats...Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
Just contradicted yourself there very quickly. The main reason why there may be a P/U & C/N team would be because ye exclude your nationalist community from your own team. That may turn out to be the inevitable consequence of your own policy. (facepalm)Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
Because they probably thought the IFA was run by a bunch of sectarian lunatics, and it was better not to get involved!!Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
GO....AND...CHANGE...IT...;)Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
The IRFU have made a lot of steps to overcome this. Irelands Call was played at Twickenham on Saturday if you noticed. IRFU flags and not tricolours are predominant at matches. The flag of the Ulster branch of the IRFU is flown alongside the tricolour and IRUF flag at Corker/Lansdowne Road. Remember Ulster Rugby is responsible not just for the 6 counties of NI but also the other 3 counties as well. Under your criteria it would be just as inappropriate to fly the NI flag as the tricolour at Ravenhill (which is owned by the IRFU)Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
Some more needs to be done but, dear oh dear, the IFA have done none of the above :rolleyes: Dear Lord EG you are desperate
Great attitude that. Get over the eligibility rules then!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
The death threat was not issued for sectarian reasons, as you well know.Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
It is the most popular forum, therefore it certainly more representative than any otherQuote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
Control freakery comes naturally to those brought up to think the place is theirs and theirs alone.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
When they realise they cannot trap the minority (which they gerrymandered artificially), panic sets in and the childish name-calling and strops ensue
Bring on an all-UK team I say! Lets wrap this up once and for all. The NI fans can head to London, and we can get some peace...Quote:
Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
NI fans call the UK a country or NI a country interchangely depending on their argument. Recently they have started calling themselves Irish to twist an eligibility ruling. Interesting if they are Irish why the would be reduced to insulting 80%+ of their own fellow countrymen/beggars/gypsies...Quote:
Originally Posted by Nedser
Realistically GSTQ is the anthem of both (see Twickenham on Saturday). Its is less contentious in both Scotland & Wales, but is played in neither. Any NI fans on here wish to explain once more what the plan is regarding anthems ie dates/suggestions?Quote:
Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
Its also Ireland (a la carte) when you trying to interpret the rules to stop the RCs from escaping to "beggarland"!Quote:
Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
The existence of the NI team is in a much more dubious state than the allowance of any Irish-born person to represent Ireland. The IFA would need to watch themselves...Quote:
Originally Posted by Nedser
There is no shortage of evidence of players, already in the NI set-up, being approached. Without exception, these appear to have been from the Nationalist communityQuote:
Originally Posted by Qwerty
only. Known FAI scouts are frequently seen at NI under-age games, with their video cameras etc, sometimes even outside NI.
Considering these games include friendlies, or competitions in which the ROI are not involved (therefore not going to meet at some later stage), what other reason could these scouts have for being there, other than to run the eye over possible recruits?
So are crucial Handballs/Refereeing mistakes. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Qwerty
However, whilst human error is largely unavoidable, other grievances are "man-made" and so can be reversed.
Er, because we feel that players born within our jurisdiction, on whom we have spent time, effort and money developing, ought not to be permitted to play for another Association without their also meeting the usual ancestry/residence criteria demanded of (every?) other Member Associations of FIFA worldwide.Quote:
Originally Posted by Qwerty
Representing a country in international football is not a matter of choice; it cannot be, since it is essentially based on where a player (or his parents/grandparents) are born - something which self-evidently cannot be "chosen" by anyone! Instead, it is a matter of Eligibility.
To take a non-politically charged example, Andrew Driver wants to represent Scotland, he "feels" Scottish and lives and has plied his trade in Scotland for years. Moreover, the country of his birth (England), has no particular objection to his playing for Scotland. Yet he is ineligible to represent them under the four Home Associations' application of the eligibility criteria.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/foo...d-country.html
The problem in the NI/ROI context, however, is that a politically-motivated gesture by the Irish Government (i.e. the automatic right to a Passport granted to anyone born in NI) is being used anachronistically by the FAI to exploit a loophole in the application of the Eligibility requirements by FIFA.
Everyone accepts that Duffy is entitled, via his Da, to play for ROI. However, the reason why this has flared up again is twofold. First, we have invested an enormous amount of capital in Duffy, who to all appearances was (at least) relatively happy to play for us. However, he looks to have had his head turned at a very late stage by a high-level intervention by the FAI/Brady. Such an intervention is "raising the stakes", regardless of his ancestral eligibility.Quote:
Originally Posted by Qwerty
Second, as many as five(?) members of a current ROI under-age squad are NI-born. Quite honestly, we could have coped with the odd Saul Deeney or Henry McStay in the past, for the sake of good relations (if nothing else). But this now risks getting way too serious to ignore.
Disagree fundamentally, for two reasons.Quote:
Originally Posted by Qwerty
First, FIFA has always abrogated to itself the complete right not to be influenced by Governments or other political bodies. That is why, for instance, it recognises 208 "countries" (Member Associations), when the United Nations only lists 192 Members. So that when eg Qatar conferred perfectly legal citizenship on a number of Brazilians so as to make them available to play football for them, FIFA rushed in a Rule that unless one has citizenship by birthright, then players must also meet additional eligibility criteria, such as ancestry or residence to play for their new country.
Such a measure was effective in suppressing any future moves by other countries; however, the application/interpretation of the new arrangement failed to take account of the (unique?) situation in Ireland, whereby the ROI automatically offers a Passport at birth to a group of people born outwith their own jurisdiction, for essentially political reasons.
Consequently, the IFA is getting "screwed" for the sake of other countries politics.
The second objection is that like it or not, Ireland has two international football Associations/teams, recognised by FIFA. Each Association/team should be accorded equal respect as regards jurisdiction etc.
However, one of these Associations (IFA) is being disadvantaged by the other Association exploiting an anachronism in the laws of its own Government in Dublin - an anachronism which does not work the other way and about which the IFA can do nothing. Worse still, this Passport-at-Birth was introduced by Dublin long before FIFA needed any such Eligibility criteria, and for reasons which had absolutely nothing to do with football.
Not sure of the details of either player, but we (IFA) have not sought to exploit their situation either for our own ends, or at the expense of a neighbouring Association. In fact, we have not interfered in either case, by word or deed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Qwerty
Balls! Gibson was developed first by Institute FC (IFA member club) and as for Duffy, here is what his father had to say as recently as three weeks ago, on OWC:Quote:
Originally Posted by Qwerty
"one thing is for sure there is no way shane would be were he is todayif it was not for n/ireland.from paddy mcgongle in the milk cup to dessie currie in the victory shield then paul kee u/17s to steve beadlehole u/19s 21s and nigal himself shane has so much respect for all these men any rightfull so all topmen,shane loves to play for n/ireland and always has done"
Of course he might not make it. But considering that the FAI are rolling out the red carpet for him eg by inviting him and his family to be guests of honour at the Emirates tomorrow night etc, it seems they think he's got a great chance.Quote:
Originally Posted by Qwerty
If it just a "business" matter, why bother to have eligibility criteria in the first place?Quote:
Originally Posted by Qwerty
Why not just let players represent whichever country they like?
Hell, we could have a transfer market between countries; that way, for the money we would receive from England for Jonny Evans, we could afford to "buy back" Gibson and Duffy and still have money left over...:rolleyes:
Deleted
............................So nobody knows what CAS arbitrate on then
EG you are a well articulated, but somewhat deluded, poster. How much money? Figures pleaseQuote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
Not according to his fatherQuote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
Only to deluded Unionists in the north, harking back for the days of the sealed borderQuote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
Why don't you deal with good relations in your own jurisdiction before lecturing others? You are still ignoring the aspirations of nearly half the people of your own part of the island.Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
You have done nothing to begin to address the root cause, the behaviour of your own association & fans.
Lead by example. Remember the problem is the IFA's and the IFA's alone! If you wish to make friends and influence people, you have a lot to learn!!
Wrong! Wrong! Wrong!Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr_Parker
In fact, you could not be more wrong if you tried*.
Do not make me go back into the Archives, but I trust my memory (on this topic, at least) to be able to put the record straight.
Basically, a problem originally arose in an underage tournament in europe (Germany?), not involving either NI or ROI. At such tournaments, players have to produce their Passport as evidence of identity - essentially to prevent "ringers" or over-age players etc.
However, one kid who had dual nationality presented his "wrong" Passport, which caused an officious Match Commissioner (incorrectly) to query his identity/eligibility.
Consequently, in an effort to avoid future confusion, FIFA sent out one of their regular Circulars to all their Members directing that players must produce the Passport of the country they are representing. Upon receiving their copy, someone at the IFA immediately realised that this would cause severe problems for many of our players.
And in an unusally swift move (by their usual glacial standards), they contacted FIFA as a matter of urgency, and received an explicit dispensation that NI players could produce either a UK or an ROI Passport, entirely as they wished.
From what I recall, the entire process from Circular to Dispensation took less than 96 hours. Unfortunately, however, that was sufficient time for the issue to get into the public domain, wherein certain politicians both in the Dail (Ahern?) and in Stormont (Pat Ramsey) seized the opportunity to make malicious political capital in their customary "outraged", but misplaced tone.
Indeed, even after the IFA had received their communication from FIFA, these same politicians were still attempting to claim the "credit", despite the sum total of their efforts amounting to little more than a few newspaper headlines and an instruction to the Irish Ambassador to Switzerland to "sort it out" etc. (On this latter, the issue was resolved, by letter, before anyone from the Embassy even got to arrange a meeting with FIFA!).
The phrase "pigs" and "grunts" springs to mind - especially wrt the porcine-proportioned Ramsey.
Anyhow, the situation remained unchanged from that which had always obtained from 1921: namely, as far as the IFA is concerned, NI players may travel/play on a UK Passport, an Irish Passport, another Passport entirely, or some combination of the three.
Or are we to add this "IFA demands British Passports" myth to the already long list of canards about our team, which (presumably) are dreamed up by our detractors to tarnish our name and/or justify their own prejudices?
* - You're not trying, are you?
Butler was, as you say, an isolated exception. Maik Taylor was also an isolated exception. However, since the latter's debut, the IFA haved moved with the other three "Home" Associations to close the loophole whereby Big Maik qualified for us, so his case could not be repeated, even if we, or a player, wanted.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
Does the same disbarment now apply to any future Paul Butlers?
P.S. Your may think your snide reference to "Herr Taylor" is clever. However, he qualified for a UK Passport by virtue of his British father, who happened to be stationed in Germany as a soldier at the time of Maik's birth. Further, Maik himself served in the British Army for a period before leaving to take up football full-time. Therefore, his authenticity as a citizen of the "United Kingdom of Great Britain and (ahem) Northern Ireland", rather than the Federal Republic of Germany, cannot be in any doubt.
According to FIFA, the official name of the international football team is "Republic of Ireland":Quote:
Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
http://www.fifa.com/associations/ass...r=m/index.html
And I think you'll even find these people use that designation from time-to-time, though not on every occasion, as mandated by FIFA:
http://www.fai.ie/
Aye and they have as much right eg to an education in the South, or dole money, or a Pension, or Healthcare, or to elect or reject the Government in the South etc etc etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by sligobhoy67
No difference in their citizenship at all, I'd say...
Oh ffs! Or are you really saying that the IFA introduced blue trim on their shirts to p1ss off Nationalists? I've heard some crap in my time, but that takes the biscuit.Quote:
Originally Posted by sligobhoy67
FYI, (St. Patrick's) Blue has been associated with the IFA at least as long as (Emerald) Green. Indeed, Irish/Northern Irish teams traditionally used to play in blue shirts, until they decided to switch to green, in order to avoid clashing with their regular opponents, Scotland (around 1930?).
As for the flag, we originally used the official flag of NI, before switching to the NI flag (UB). Now that the NI flag no longer has official status (since 1972), would you prefer that we revert to the Union flag?
As for the anthem, I know that many NI fans, including myself, would like to see it replaced. By contrast, none of us would like to see our emerald green shirts replaced, still less the Celtic Cross, with shamrocks, which proudly adorns the shirt. Maybe because such overtly British symbolism also p1sses off our Nationalist neighbours?
You really don't have a clue, do you?Quote:
Originally Posted by sligobhoy67
This whole dispute is over the IFA wanting to pick players from a Catholic/Nationalist background. If we only wanted a "Protestant" [sic] team, we wouldn't care about the likes of Gibson or Duffy playing for another team.
By contrast, the FAI, which proclaims it is open to ALL people born on the island nonetheless only approaches players in NI who are from a Nationalist/Catholic background.
And we are the ones who are dubbed "sectarian".
Jeez, you couldn't make it up...
Evidence please.Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
Provide evidence for the highlighted quote above and let the rest of us make our own judgements based on that evidence.Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
Wrong! Without even considering the implications for the Irish situation, FIFA merely required that players with Dual Nationality should present the Passport of the country they were representing when requested i.e. as an administrative convenience.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nedser
When the IFA saw this, they immediately moved to gain dispensation for those of our players who do not possess/want a UK Passport (see my post #214, above).
It was FIFA who requested it, the IFA didn't want such an instruction in any shape or form (see my post #214)Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
Indeed, but only following a submission by the IFA (alone), who did not want to see any of their players forced to acquire a UK Passport against their will.Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
Then you shouldn't have broken away in the first place.Quote:
Originally Posted by seanfhear
But I daresay if you apply to be readmitted to the IFA, such application will be treated with all the merit it deserves...
Then why not go off and be a rugby fan, then? Personally, I couldn't care less what they do in other sports - and I say that as someone who was at Twickenham on Saturday!Quote:
Originally Posted by seanfhear
In common with my fellow NI fans, I no more want an all-Ireland team than I want eg an all-UK one. As "Northern Ireland", we have proudly existed for nearly 90 years, and as "Ireland" for 40 years before that.Quote:
Originally Posted by seanfhear
As an ROI fan, you might be happy to see your team disappear*, but we have far too much self-respect and pride in our team to see ours cease to exist - "IFA - Original and (George) Best!"
* - Unless, of course, you actually are demanding that our team be disbanded, to merely be annexed by yours? Surely not?